YourCT.com header image 2

Norwalk: Hey Why Not A Film Office?


by turfgrrl


February 21st, 2008 · 4 Comments

Having someone dedicated to promoting Norwalk as a film location makes good sense. Having film crews come in does benefit the economy, and certainly adds a little excitement to the everyday war on potholes. Maybe even the great minds of government can suddenly realize that having old buildings that film makers want to take pictures of might be a good thing, Stephen King meet 93 East ave.

When it comes to filming a major motion picture, a lot of decidedly unglamorous steps come before “Lights, camera, action!”

One of those steps is applying for a film permit - a process that can take weeks in Norwalk.

To streamline the process and better monitor where productions are filming, Norwalk officials are considering adopting a special film permit that would give the mayor the authority to sign off on filming that meets standard criteria.

The Common Council’s Land Use & Building Management Committee is expected to review the proposal tonight at a City Hall meeting.

“What we’re trying to do is come up with a procedure for when these things come in, there’s an easier way to deal with them so we’re not going back to the council every time one of these comes in,” said city attorney Robert Maslan. “The purpose is to encourage filming and make it a simpler process.”

Last year, about 10 productions filmed in Norwalk, according to City Clerk Mary Roman.

The business continues to gain momentum with production of “Confessions of a Shopaholic” starring Isla Fisher and Hugh Dancy. Kirsten Dunst is expected to co-star with Ryan Gosling in “All Good Things,” to be shot in the city in April.

Connecticut’s film industry boomed after the General Assembly passed a 30 percent tax credit program in 2006. Before the program, about $700,000 worth of productions were shot in the state. That number is now about $500 million, with $156 million in tax credits pending, according to the state’s film office.

Norwalk is full of great locations. A few that spring to mind.

28 Days Later –> Vet’s Park
Clerks 2 –> Norwalk Museum
Waterworld –> Klondike Park
Napoleon Dynamite –> Corda’s Office

Feel free to suggest your own.

Creating a specific film permit would allow officials to keep better track of productions and spread them out across the city so no single neighborhood gets burned out, Moccia said.

“This would give us an opportunity to track (film productions) and keep a separate file on them,” he said. “We don’t want to kill the golden goose but we don’t want to inconvenience the neighborhoods in town just to make a movie. ”

In an effort to maintain that same balance, city officials are also grappling with whether to charge a permit fee and how much.

Special event permits cost $5 per day and require proof of insurance or a minimum of $1 million in coverage. Most film productions have their own insurance, Roman said.

“We don’t want to make this too complicated, because we want to make sure we encourage the industry to use Norwalk but we want to make sure that any inconvenience it might be causing people, that there’s some kind of monetary offset,” said Councilman Douglas Hempstead, who chairs the land use committee.

Karen Senich, acting director of the state’s Commission on Culture and Tourism, said her office gets many inquiries from cities and towns trying to figure out how to deal with Hollywood productions, including permit structures.

Her office is extending an invitation to the state’s 169 municipalities to attend a March 24 workshop on hosting film productions.

“This is very new and it really varies by each city and town. Everybody is trying to figure out what works for them,” Senich said.

Moccia said permits should be free, because production crews and tourists who come from out of town to watch shoots already bring financial benefits to businesses such as hotels and restaurants. Productions also generate publicity for the city, he said.

If fees were instituted, they could go toward hiring someone to coordinate film productions full time, he said. Film productions are primarily coordinated by Tad Diesel, Norwalk’s director of marketing and business development.

Kevin Segalla, president and founder of Stamford-based Connecticut Film Center, said complicated permit approval processes and exorbitant fees can dissuade productions from working in some towns and cities. The center provides production services and tax-incentive based financing for productions that come to the area.

“When it gets too complicated for productions, it will hamper their ability to shoot in town and when they have to go through a long approval process, they will go to towns where they don’t have to go through that,” Segalla said.

In Stamford, the Office of Cashiering and Permitting, which issues beach and parking permits, also oversees film permits, which cost $100 to file. Stamford’s film permit was established more than five years ago, long before the boom, said Frank Fedeli, the city’s liaison for movie companies.

Stamford’s permit, which does not require approval by anyone other than department heads, including Fedeli and the city’s risk manager, has held up well, he said.

source:Advocate, City considers special permit for filmmakers, By Alexandra Fenwick, February 21 2008

Tags: Norwalk

4 Responses so far “Norwalk: Hey Why Not A Film Office?”



  • 1 Anonymous // Feb 21, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    Having films shot around Norwalk is great, however, a few details need to be worked out. For example, Film crews have had already several shoots on North Main in SoNo. These crews take over the parking lots with huge R.V.’s and trailers, they close off the block completely from traffic (not that your going to find a parking spot anyway with all those trailers,etc) and this kills the small businesses from doing business. What’s really the worst, is when they kill a restaurants business, then bring in a caterer from New York City and feed these crews in the streets right in front of their own retaurants!! These Film crews should at the very least buy the food from the restaurants that are losing their regular business due to their filming. It really is the least they can do,

  • 2 fed up // Feb 22, 2008 at 5:44 am

    the only reason they are here is because the state is reimbursing them 30%, 30%!!!! of what they spend in CT to entice them to come here.

    I don’t believe that that is a good use of my tax dollars. Let’s see, they pay 6% sales tax and get 30% back, a 24% gain. Not a bad deal. They should at least lower ticket prices for any film shot in CT since we’ve already paid for it whether we like it or not.

    I can live without the film shoots thank you very much.

  • 3 Anonymous // Feb 22, 2008 at 9:01 am

    #2 I’m with you, fed up. Having moved here from NYC, I know what it is to have your neighborhood torn up with generator trucks and trailers all week long. I know what it’s like to go through a maze of security just to go to the store for some bread.

    My landlord decided once to rent out his brownstone for a Ford commercial. It was summer, 99 degrees outside, and we had to sit inside without any air conditioning for 2 days so the production guys could here the same actor repeat the same sentence over and over. It was more than a little inconvenience.

    Just who is Rell fooling anyway? That 30% comes from taxpayer money and our pockets. These people don’t frequent local delis, they get their meals catered. Don’t the merchants have enough problems with parking for local people. Do they really need these big trucks and trailers taking up what little parking there is?

  • 4 Anonymous Too // Feb 22, 2008 at 9:38 am

    This wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that city officials get to meet and hob nob with celebrities, and feed their already fat egos, would it?

Leave a Reply